text:
Friday, June 29, 2012
Do I Have a Letter for YOU!
Posted by californiadreamin at Friday, June 29, 2012 2 comments Links to this post
Thursday, June 28, 2012
Prayers Needed
Posted by californiadreamin at Thursday, June 28, 2012 2 comments Links to this post
Labels: pray
Friday, June 22, 2012
Posted by californiadreamin at Friday, June 22, 2012 6 comments Links to this post
Labels: blogs, fitness, inspiration
Friday, June 15, 2012
Fridays Letters
Posted by californiadreamin at Friday, June 15, 2012 4 comments Links to this post
Labels: Friday
Tuesday, June 12, 2012
Show and Tell Vlog
Posted by californiadreamin at Tuesday, June 12, 2012 11 comments Links to this post
Friday, June 8, 2012
Fridays Letters
Dear Thor's little brother: Miley? Really? Look, I loved "The Climb" too, but is she that good that you wanna put a ring on it? You've heard her talk? MMMk....
Dear Biotin: please hurry up your magical powers and make my hair grow like this
Dear Hair: I like what you've been doing lately. Your letting me have fun with curling you and not flattening after 2 hours.
Dear Troy Maximus: you are getting more and more fun (and active) every day. The things you do to make your dad and I laugh... I swear kid, you can thank me for that center of attention desire.
Dear Target: Im walking in there to get 2 things - body wash and socks for the hubs. PLEASE don't hyptonize me with those clearance racks & conscious, don't whisper to me, "Well today IS payday and all....".
Posted by californiadreamin at Friday, June 08, 2012 6 comments Links to this post
Labels: Friday
Thursday, June 7, 2012
Momma Bear
Can we just get real here for a second? Lets talk Momma Bear instincts. Yes, I am THAT mom who is a momma bear to the fullest. When it comes to my precious T Rex monster of a son, I believe he should be tough. He is a boy, and call me old fashioned, but I think its ok and *gasp* actually good for him to fall down, scrape his knee from time to time, get dirty, climb on things, etc. I do NOT baby him in terms of life experiences that will be a valuable lesson to him. Of course, if he is gonna grab a hot item, Im not going to say "Go ahead, burn yourself kid". Y'all get the picture tho. This even comes down to playing with other kids - he needs to learn to share his toys, communicate with other kids, interact and observe, be exposed to colds to build that immune system, etc.
With that being said, I will have you know that you will see the Momma Bear mode come out when a child (for the most part older), jacks a toy from my kid just because they want it, or don't want him playing with. Same goes with if I see a kid hitting Troy, kicking him, whatev. I have sort of gotten used to immediately getting after the kid, in a proper and respectful way of course, and then making sure the parent addresses the issue. Something like "Hey, Rebecca, can you give Troy back that toy and you guys can share?" So see, not too pushy or anything.
Well, I have heard some people tell me they would prefer the kids work it out themselves, or let the other parent handle it and would NEVER confront someone else's kid. Personally, I don't see an issue if the parent themselves aren't jumping on the issue faster than I am.
So I ask you other Momma Bears (or Future Momma Bears)....What would you do?
Posted by californiadreamin at Thursday, June 07, 2012 3 comments Links to this post
Wednesday, June 6, 2012
OO La La
Posted by californiadreamin at Wednesday, June 06, 2012 8 comments Links to this post
Monday, June 4, 2012
Bow Chicka Bow Wow
Posted by californiadreamin at Monday, June 04, 2012 4 comments Links to this post


text:
Chiefs to Play Regularly Scheduled Game vs. Panthers
Related Story
KANSAS CITY -- The Kansas City Chiefs will play its regularly scheduled against the Carolina Panther on Sunday following the murder-suicide involving linebacker Jovan Belcher. The Chiefs released the following statement: "After discussions between the league office, Head Coach Romeo Crennel and Chiefs team captains, the Chiefs advised the NFL that it will play tomorrow's game vs. the Carolina Panthers at its originally scheduled time."
Kansas City police say Belcher fatally shot girlfriend Kasandra M. Perkins Saturday morning before taking his own life at the Arrowhead Stadium.
Kansas City Chiefs Chairman & CEO Clark Hunt released the following statement: "The entire Chiefs family is deeply saddened by today's events, and our collective hearts are heavy with sympathy, thoughts and prayers for the families and friends affected by this unthinkable tragedy. We sincerely appreciate the expressions of sympathy and support we have received from so many in the Kansas City and NFL communities, and ask for continued prayers for the loved ones of those impacted. We will continue to fully cooperate with the authorities and work to ensure that the appropriate counseling resources are available to all members of the organization."
The 1-10 Chiefs will host the 3-8 Panthers at noon on FOX.

subset: commoncrawl


text:
Since I accidentally spawned this discussion, I think I need to add on. I agree with Bruce about the MMV. I've never build the first one, I had it briefly but donated it to the CCC once. I didn't buy Helms Deep, but sure I could see it being considered here. And I didn't buy the Joust set, but that too I could find relevancy in this thread. I have a very hard time adding on. I have been waiting for someone to bring up the Mill Village Raid...and trying to not say what I truly think of that set. I didn't enjoy that build at all. So I wouldn't ever put it in this discussion...but I think it may come up. But did you notice, the ones we have mentioned tend to be the kind that was direct to LEGO, or limited..or designed with the AFOL in mind?
But I find more inspiration from non-castle sets currently...which isn't what we are talking about in this thread...so I will keep those to myself.


text:
The New Unmarried Moms
We've reduced teen pregnancy, but now childbearing outside wedlock is exploding among 20-somethings
For many Americans, the phrase "young single mother" conjures up a picture of a teenage high-school dropout. But that image is out of date. Teen pregnancy rates have been declining for two decades now. Today's typical unmarried mother is a high-school graduate in her early 20s who may very well be living with her child's father.
Despite her apparent advantages, however, she faces many of the same problems that we used to associate with her younger sisters. If 30 is the new 20,...
To Read the Full Story


text:
Post Code Map in PDF Format
Main Regions are highlighted (e.g. CV, NN, MK, etc...) and then smaller regions thereafter
(e.g. CV1, NN12, MK34, etc..)
Ideal for patch planning, sales & marketing etc..
Approximate size of each map is 12" x 17" (Native Size: A3)
With a suitable PDF viewer, it can be accessed from your Computer, Laptop, iPad or your
Mobile Phone.
To aid the speed of the download, this file has been compressed using standard "zip"
Once downloaded, your map can be decompressed using freely available software.
If you find you are unable to decompress your map, please contact us for assistance.


text:
The rollup rolls on.
Atlanta Capital Group announced Wednesday that it had surpassed $1 billion in assets under advisement with the merger of neighboring PFM Capital Holdings, a private family office based in the Peach State. This is the eleventh such deal for Atlanta Capital, whose East Coast presence stretches from Massachusetts to Georgia.
With this merger, Atlanta Capital Group claims it is ahead of what it sees as a national trend of family offices, traditionally reserved for the ultrawealthy, now serving clients with assets under $100 million.
"Our sweet spot is that $5 million to $20 million range," says Jeff Shaver (left), founding principal partner at Atlanta Capital. "Goldman Sachs doesn't want the $5 million accounts, to tell you the truth. But we're scalable, and can service clients of that size."
He cites the Family Wealth Alliance in noting there are more than 100,000 families with between $5 million and $20 million in the United States. Atlanta Capital Group aims to offer a higher level of service to these high-net-worth families, including investment advice, financial planning, family governance, planned giving, and administrative work, according to Shaver.
"We've known of Bob Atkinson for a long time," he adds, referring to Robert Atkinson, founder of PFM Capital Holdings, when explaining the genesis of the merger. "A number of companies were going after his business, but because we knew the nature of his firm and had these discussions before, it was a great fit."
Atkinson founded PFM Capital Management in 1992 to meet the comprehensive financial needs of high-net-worth individuals and families, corporate executives and family-owned businesses. The decision to merge with Atlanta Capital Group was done in the interest of his clients, he says. Atkinson is now a Managing Partner with Atlanta Capital Group.
Atlanta Capital Group was founded10 years ago by David Millican, Shaver and Jody Young with $82 million in assets. It was named an Emerging RIA by Forbes Magazine.
Check out RIA-to-RIA Deals Dominate in 2013: Pershing Advisor Solutions on ThinkAdvisor.


text:
Budget battle resumes… On drones and executive power: Congress vs. the public… Obama's Spring Break -- to Israel… President today to tap female CEO to replace Salazar as head of Interior Dept… GOP focuses more on changing tone than changing policies… But one exception: Eric Cantor now supports the DREAM Act… And the "Oh, crap" moments from the 2012 campaign.
The Daily Rundown's Chuck Todd reports on President Barack Obama's budget plan.
*** Budget battle resumes: Goodbye fiscal cliff and debt ceiling; hello to the effort to delay or suspend the sequester -- the automatic defense and other spending cuts set to take effect on March 1. Roll Call: "This time, the scale may be smaller but the game is the same — in the president's eyes, either congressional Republicans agree to more new tax revenue or they will bear responsibility for the economic damage and hundreds of thousands of lost jobs from the sequester taking effect." In his brief remarks yesterday, President Obama tried to send two other messages besides the demand for more revenue to delay the sequester. First, the White House wants to dispel the notion that it's comfortable with the sequester, something that many Democrats (and some Republicans) thought was NOT clear. "Deep, indiscriminate cuts to things like education and training, energy and national security will cost us jobs, and it will slow down our recovery," Obama said. Second, Obama signaled that once the sequester is delayed, he wants Congress to work its will resolving the outstanding budget issues. "Congress is already working towards a budget that would permanently replace the sequester. At the very least, we should give them the chance to come up with this budget instead of making indiscriminate cuts now that will cost us jobs and significantly slow down our recovery." What does this mean? The White House is prepared to see Congress work the old-fashioned way: The Senate passes a budget (with White House input), the House passes a budget (maybe all of this done before the August recess at the latest), and then the House and Senate actually negotiate a budget to send to the president for his signature. So no more Boehner-Obama talks, no more Biden-McConnell discussions.
Joshua Roberts / Reuters
President Barack Obama calls on Congress to pass a small package of spending cuts and tax reforms that would delay the larger, automatic "sequester" cuts from going into effect during an announcement in the White House briefing room, Feb. 5, 2013.
*** White House vs. House Republicans -- again: For their part, House Republicans are opposing any more revenue to delay the sequester. "We believe there is a better way to reduce the deficit, but Americans do not support sacrificing real spending cuts for more tax hikes," Speaker John Boehner said yesterday. "The president's sequester should be replaced with spending cuts and reforms that will start us on the path to balancing the budget in 10 years." But Republicans are divided here. Some, particularly those in the Senate (like John McCain) don't want the sequester to take place, given its cuts in defense spending. But many House Republicans (like Paul Ryan) are becoming more and more comfortable with the sequester taking place -- as a way to cut spending. Meanwhile, Politico reports that Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell "warned Senate Republicans in a private meeting on Tuesday that spending cuts the GOP seeks are going to require a fight. 'Nobody said cutting spending would be easy, we need to fight,' McConnell told Republicans on Tuesday, according to a source with knowledge of the statement."
*** On drones and executive power: Congress vs. the public: The drone story remains in the news today, and there are two ways to look at this issue. One, the Obama White House has a political problem with Congress here, especially with John Brennan's confirmation hearing to lead the CIA taking place tomorrow. A senator to keep an eye on here is Sen. Ron Wyden (D-OR). But two, the White House doesn't seem to have as much of a political problem with the public. As we wrote yesterday, the public -- like it did in the Bush years -- is content to go after the bad guys, regardless of concerns about a slippery slope. And here is a reason why this drone story might not extend beyond the Brennan hearings: The political opposition has been mostly quiet. As we've seen with other political controversies (say Benghazi or Fast and Furious), one party heavily leaning into a story extends its life, no matter the merits. But we're not seeing that from the GOP, at least not yet. The scrutiny so far is coming from the left and the news media, and that's it. We're really surprised at the lack of outrage from Congress so far. Why aren't more members of Congress upset that a second branch of government doesn't have any oversight over this executive branch program?
*** Obama's Spring Break -- to Israel: As we reported yesterday, Obama this spring will make his first visit to Israel as president, and he also will travel to the West Bank and Jordan. (Obama made a stop to Israel during his 2008 presidential campaign.) The New York Times notes the potential politics behind Obama's visit, given the rocky relations between the president and Israeli PM Netanyahu. "While Mr. Obama won a clear victory in November, Mr. Netanyahu emerged from elections last month in a weakened state. His party won enough seats for him to retain office, but he will be forced to recruit centrist lawmakers for a coalition that might temper his policies. He has until March 16 to present his new government." The Israeli press is reporting that Obama's visit will take place on March 20. By the way, No way the president would agree to go to Israel unless Netanyahu wasn't promising SOME progress on the peace talks. And given Netanyahu's new precarious domestic political situation, it seems inevitable that there would be a jump start in the peace talks.
*** Obama to tap female CEO to replace Salazar at Interior Department: NBC News confirms this scoop from the Washington Post: "President Obama on Wednesday will nominate Recreational Equipment Inc. (REI) chief executive Sally Jewell to head the Interior Department, according to a White House official who asked not to be identified because the public announcement has not yet been made. The choice of Jewell — who began her career as an engineer for Mobil Oil Corp. and worked as a commercial banker before heading a nearly $2 billion outdoors equipment company — represents an unconventional choice for a post usually reserved for career politicians from the West. But while she boasts less public policy experience than other candidates who had been under consideration, Jewell — who will have to be confirmed by the Senate — has earned national recognition for her management skills and support for outdoor recreation and habitat conservation."
*** Let's talk about tone, baby… Let's talk about you and me: After their defeats last November, do Republicans modify their policies? Or their tone? NBC's Mike O'Brien writes that most Republicans -- so far -- have opted for Door No. 2, deciding "that a more articulate re-statement of the party's long-held principles will suffice in their effort to attract new voters to the GOP." And that's probably to best way to view House Majority Leader Eric Cantor's speech yesterday to the conservative American Enterprise Institute. With one exception (more on that below), Cantor's address was mostly a repackaging of policies he and other Republicans have previously backed, albeit with a much softer and more inviting tone. Yet here is the challenge for Republicans as they focus more on tone than policies: Majorities of Americans rejected some of the party's central principles, according to the exit polls from the November presidential election. For instance, 60% said income tax rates should either go up on all Americans or those with incomes above $250,000; 59% said abortion should be legal in all or most cases; and 65% favored giving illegal immigrants a path to legal status. It's rare to find politicians in Washington who believe their political beliefs cost them an election or a policy defeat; they almost ALWAYS blame communications.
*** To DREAM the impossible DREAM: The one clear policy shift that Cantor signaled in his speech, however, was on the topic of immigration. He appeared to back the primary thrust of the DREAM Act, despite voting against that legislation in 2010. "One of the great founding principles of our country was that children would not be punished for the mistakes of their parents," Cantor said, per NBC's Luke Russert. "It is time to provide an opportunity for legal residence and citizenship for those who were brought to this country as children and who know no other home." That shift by Cantor tells you that the politics of immigration have changed. Another example: At the House hearing yesterday on immigration reform, House Republicans said they favored a path to legal residency -- but not citizenship -- for illegal immigrants, the New York Times notes. That's a significant policy difference, which will be debated in the weeks ahead. But it's also a sign that this is 2005-2007, when even a discussion of legal residency produced cries of "amnesty." By the way, Republican Govs. Susana Martinez of New Mexico and Brian Sandoval of Nevada hold a conference call at 10:00 am ET to announce the formation of the Future Majority Caucus -- an effort by the Republican State Leadership Committee to recruit and elect more female and minority Republican candidates to statewide office.
*** The "Oh, crap" moments of 2012: Yesterday, at the University of Chicago, one of us moderated a panel with top officials from the Obama and Romney campaigns. We asked them what their "Oh, crap" -- cleaned up here for language -- moments of the campaign were. Eric Fehrnstrom of the Romney campaign answered Gingrich winning South Carolina; Beth Myers of the Romney camp said it was Romney's three-state loss to Santorum (on Colorado, Minnesota, and Missouri); Romney strategist Stuart Stevens said it was the close primary race in Michigan; Obama campaign manager Jim Messina said it was their worry that Romney might wrap up the nomination after the New Hampshire primary. And speaking of "Oh, crap" moments, NBC's Luke Russert explored what happened to that empty chair Clint Eastwood spoke to at the GOP convention in Tampa. As it turns out, the chair now sits in RNC Chair Reince Preibus' office.
Click here to sign up for First Read emails.
Text FIRST to 622639, to sign up for First Read alerts to your mobile phone.
Check us out on Facebook and also on Twitter. Follow us @chucktodd, @mmurraypolitics, @DomenicoNBC, @brookebrower


text:
Canada's most popular online source for Doctors, Health Care Professionals.
Copyright © 2020 Doctors Listings | Disclaimer | Contact us | Advertising
All listings are for information purposes only and are not warranted for
content, accuracy or any other implied or explicit purpose.
The author and publisher shall in no event be held liable to any party for any
direct, indirect, punitive, special, incidental or other consequential damages
arising directly or indirectly from any use of this material, which is provided
"as is", and without warranties.


text:
Ion8 Leak Proof Sports Water Bottle, 550ml / 20oz, Navy
A 100% leak proof 550ml / 20oz odour free, easy open water bottle with concave sides and a soft-touch easy grip textured comfort band, in Navy Blue. Winner of 2 international design awards (Red Dot 2016, and iF 2017), it is the perfect designer water bottle for general use. Open these drinking bottles with one hand, and lock them closed for peace of mind when throwing into a bag. Made from BPA free, phthalate free, non-toxic TRITAN, this versatile drinks bottle is odour resistant, easy to hand wash and suitable for hot or cold drinks. This has a vented, smooth liquid flow for rapid hydration.


text:
- Font:
- +
- -
Guests: Peter Orszag, Rep. Jeb Hensarling, Jay Newton-Small, David Corn, Anne Kornblut
HOST: The battle over numbers. Let's play HARDBALL! Good evening. I'm Chris Matthews in Washington. Leading off tonight:
Budget baloney. President Obama's face-off with House Republicans on Friday remains one of the most remarkable political performances we've seen in memory. One Republican who got smacked down by the president was Jeb Hensarling of Texas. He'll join us in a minute and we'll give him another chance. We'll ask him whether it's fair to blame President Obama for trillion-dollar deficits when the president inherited trillion-dollar deficits.
President Obama answered questions this afternoon on YouTube just days after his bravura performance with Republicans and his well-received State of the Union address. It may be to early to say, but has the president got his groove back?
Plus, Andrew Young is certainly getting even with his former boss, John Edwards. If Young's out-of-school tales about Edwards's cheating and serial mendacity are true, we have to ask, How did this man become a leading presidential candidate?
Also, why are so many conservatives bagging this week's tea party convention? And how did the Democrats lose Massachusetts? Well, check out "Saturday Night Live's" take.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Our nominee, Martha Coakley, was the single most incompetent candidate ever to seek a public office in this nation's history!
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Shame on you, Martha Coakley!
MATTHEWS: A lot more of that in the HARDBALL "Sideshow."
We start, however, with Peter Orszag, who's director—was the director of the Office of Management and Budget. Sir, you've got a big job, so I'm going to ask you a big question. The American people are hurting right now. You're in charge of the budget. How do you use the budget to get the unemployment rate down from 10 percent while we're all still alive?
PETER ORSZAG, DIR., OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT & BUDGET: Well, two things. First, we need some additional job creation measures now. For example, the president put forward a new jobs and wages tax credit, which will help spur hiring and wage increases among small businesses. And then we need to get the deficit down over time to make sure that job creation can continue and private sector activity can expand.
MATTHEWS: I've always wondered, since this administration took office, why you don't use the oldtime religion. Why don't you do what they used to do, get all the public works projects which are backed up, have all been approved but haven't been funded, go to every state that wants a bridge that's below code, everywhere that's below code—and there are a lot of them out there—and say, Go build them, go fix them? Why don't you start with Monahan (ph) Station in New York? Why don't you build that? Why don't you start building rapid rail from our big cities so we can catch up to the Europeans?
ORSZAG: Well...
MATTHEWS: Why don't we do big stuff in the federal government anymore, like Eisenhower did, like Lincoln did?
ORSZAG: That's exactly what we are doing in the Recovery Act. There are billions and billions of dollars in transportation investments that will be—that are building bridges and roads. And with regard to high-speed rail, the Recovery Act included more than $7 billion in investments in high-speed rail in this budget, continues that by providing another billion.
MATTHEWS: Well, where are they? OK, we're in Washington, D.C. Point one out to me. Where can I go tonight and see rapid transit? Where can I see bridges being built, roads being—I don't see them.
ORSZAG: The Department of Transportation—in fact, the president was down in Florida last week, making an announcement about some new plans. This does take time to build the high-speed rail of the future, but it's a good investment to make.
MATTHEWS: Yes, I'm still not hearing it yet, sir. I think we need more volume and more activity and not just a pilot project to connect Tampa to Disneyland.
ORSZAG: They're not—no, no. These are—they're not pilot projects.
MATTHEWS: Really?
ORSZAG: These are billions of dollars of investments in the future of our rail system.
MATTHEWS: OK, let me ask you about...
ORSZAG: It's exactly what you're calling for.
MATTHEWS: ... this freeze we've got. I know. I want more, OK?
MATTHEWS: You're not going to make me happy, but that's not your job anyway. You can try.
MATTHEWS: Let me ask you about this problem with the freeze. It seems to me, if you look at the new budget, it's got $3.8 billion in outlays. If you look at what's left in the budget, after you take out the security issues—defense, veterans, energy, Homeland Security—after you take out the entitlements, Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, if you take out interest payments, all that's mandatory—you're left with about 10 percent of the budget that you can freeze, am I right?
ORSZAG: A little north of that. It's 14 percent. But OK, let's—continue. Yes.
MATTHEWS: OK. So how can...
ORSZAG: It's not the majority...
MATTHEWS: ... really restrict federal spending if you're only restricting 14 percent of it, its growth? How much are you really holding down on federal spending?
ORSZAG: Well...
MATTHEWS: If I said, I'm only going to take one seventh of my income and start spending less than that, people would say, That's not really...
ORSZAG: That's not all we're doing.
MATTHEWS: OK. Tell me what you're doing.
ORSZAG: No, no. That's not all we're doing, so...
ORSZAG: The freeze on non-security discretionary spending will save $250 billion over 10 years. That's only part of the $1.2 trillion in deficit reduction that is part of this budget. So look, we never said it was the end-all, be-all. It is an important step, but it's not the only step.
MATTHEWS: So you're going to save about what, $25 billion a year?
ORSZAG: From that step, yes, an average of $25 billion a year.
MATTHEWS: So you're going to save $25 billion a year on a $3.8 trillion budget.
ORSZAG: But that, again, is only part of the deficit reduction that we've put forward. We've put forward more than a trillion dollars in deficit reduction over the next decade.
MATTHEWS: OK. Let me ask you about how you make calculations because you've got a very tough job. I mean, I used to work at OMB. I used to work on the Budget Committee. I know how hard it is.
ORSZAG: You used to work at OMB?
MATTHEWS: Yes, I was on the Government Reorganization Project...
MATTHEWS: ... in '77 to '78, '79. Let me ask you this...
ORSZAG: Who knew?
MATTHEWS: And I got to be a speech writer, which was a better job.
MATTHEWS: Let me ask you about this question. How do you deal with the threat—the Chinese have a lot of our paper. We're borrowing a lot from abroad. What's the tipping point where we've just run too big a deficit for too long? We've got about 1.6 looking at us now, it was 1.2. How do we know we're at the point where nobody's going to buy our paper, we're going into debt, but we're going so far into debt that people aren't buying our debt anymore? And that's when our dollar shrinks. When do we reach the point of no return, or well, diminishing returns in terms of budget and deficit?
ORSZAG: Well, we need to get ahead of that problem. Right now, what's happened is private sector borrowing has collapsed. And that's a big reason why, despite these deficits, the 10-year Treasury is yielding less than 4 percent. It's because Treasury securities remain the safest in the world and investors are seeking that safety and security...
MATTHEWS: I see.
ORSZAG: ... while other private borrowing has collapsed. As borrowing picks up in the rest of the economy, there will be upward pressure on Treasury securities, and we need to get ahead of that.
MATTHEWS: OK. Well, I hope we don't reach that point. I ask you about it only...
ORSZAG: I agree.
MATTHEWS: ... of fear that we don't want to be where we can't borrow anymore. Thank you, Peter Orszag. You've got a tough job, OMB director at the White House.
Well, now we're going to have some fun here. Republican congressman Jeb Hensarling of Texas told President Obama at Friday's House Republican retreat—it turned out not to be a retreat—that the old annual deficits under Republicans have become the monthly deficits under Democrats, an assertion that the president shot down.
Do you still argue, sir, that the monthly deficits of Barack Obama are equal to the Republican annual deficits?
REP. JEB HENSARLING (R-TX), BUDGET COMMITTEE: Well, that's not what I said. I said Democratic deficits. Chris, you know, you've been in Washington. only Congress—only Congress...
MATTHEWS: Right.
HENSARLING: ... can pass spending bills. I've got a chart that shows it right here. If you take the 12 years that Republicans were in control of Congress, you had budget deficits of roughly $104 billion a year. Now, listen, I'm embarrassed about that. But in the three years that Democrats have been in charge of Congress, what you have is actually budget deficits that are approaching $1.1 trillion. So yes, I stand by the assertion.
MATTHEWS: Well let me explain this...
HENSARLING: Maybe the president misunderstood me. Otherwise, he has his facts wrong.
MATTHEWS: Well, let me go this way. If you look at the deficit as it's grown over time—as you know, it's grown over time—by the time this president took office, the FY, I guess, 2010 budget was already up to $1.2 trillion. He's now causing—he's now calling for a budget deficit of $1.6 trillion. So he's basically taking it from $100 billion a month to $133 billion a month. That's about a third increase per month. That's really what the increase has been under his watch, right?
MATTHEWS: No, let's just talk about this president because that's the guy you were debating.
HENSARLING: Well, again, Chris, all the president can—no, no, no, no, no.
MATTHEWS: Huh?
HENSARLING: No. No.
MATTHEWS: But isn't that factually correct?
HENSARLING: Read the transcript, please, of what I—what I said.
MATTHEWS: No, I'm—look, I'm not arguing...
HENSARLING: You're switching my words. The Congress is the one...
MATTHEWS: Let me ask you a fresh question...
HENSARLING: ... the president inherited a deficit, but he inherited it from the Democratic Congress.
MATTHEWS: Oh, OK.
HENSARLING: He inherited it from the Democrat Congress.
MATTHEWS: So...
HENSARLING: He came in—look at what happened at FY '09. Look at what he does over 10 years, what he proposes over 10 years. And although he wouldn't answer my question, or he declined to answer it on Friday, once again, we see his budget will triple the national debt over the next 10 years. And frankly, it's just unacceptable.
MATTHEWS: But you know, it is true we inherited a $1.2 trillion deficit that's gone up to $1.6 trillion. That's really what he's inherited, right?
HENSARLING: Well, again, if he inherited it, he inherited it from the Democratic Congress. The point is, are you going to make the situation worse or are you going to make it better?
MATTHEWS: OK, let's talk...
HENSARLING: It still triples the national debt. In his proposed budget over 10 years, he increases the size of government from roughly 20 percent of the economy in his budget window...
HENSARLING: ... to 25 percent of the economy. That's the question I asked on Friday, and he declined to answer it. But today, with the release of his budget, he does obviously answer the question, and the answer is yes. You can't say, I'm going to be fiscally responsible, and do these kind of things. I mean, you can't have it both ways.
MATTHEWS: This blame game—under President Bush, I don't think the president was known for vetoing spending bills, was he, President Bush.
HENSARLING: No, he wasn't. And frankly, it's one of the reasons that
Republicans were let out of office. But again, when it comes to spending -
listen, there's—there's blame on my side of the aisle. I fought my own party leadership on these spending items. You can look at the record. I've introduced budget legislation to ensure that the cost of government, the federal budget, doesn't grow faster than the family budget. I've actually written budgets in Congress.
But again, what was annual budget deficits under Republicans have become monthly budget deficits under Democrats.
HENSARLING: When it comes to...
MATTHEWS: Let's—let's...
HENSARLING: ... spending and deficits, Republicans are rank amateurs compared to Democrats.
MATTHEWS: OK, let's talk about what you would do. We have a budget
of about $3.8 billion (SIC) in outlays that's been proposed by the
president today. Once you take out Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security,
interest payments, all the security issues, you're left with about 14
percent of the budget you can actually cut. If you get rid of basically—
we're looking at a pie chart here. You're familiar with it. Once you get
rid of all that non-security discretionary spending, get rid of all of it -
you'd have to get rid of all of it to balance the budget, wouldn't you.
HENSARLING: Well, Chris, what you're going to ultimately have to do is reform entitlement spending for future generations. People who are retired, or soon to be on retirement, I mean, they need the same deal that they've counted on their whole life. But otherwise, you know, somebody's going to have to shoot straight with the American people. And ultimately, what Republicans will be proposing is, you know, to some extent we want to make sure you have the same retirement plan and the same health care plan that your member of Congress has. As you well know, that's the federal Employee Health Benefit plan. It's the thrift savings plan. It's essentially a defined contribution.
It's the only thing to keep us from bankrupting this economy and being the first generation in America's history to leave the next generation with a lower standard of living. As we all know, ultimately, you have to reform entitlement spending, but the president steps backwards.
HENSARLING: He adds new entitlement programs, new entitlement spending. He takes a bad situation, he makes it worse. And that's one of the reasons we continue to have sluggish job growth...
HENSARLING: ... in this economy because people are wondering, How are we going to pay for all this debt?
MATTHEWS: OK. Are you speaking for Eric Cantor and John Boehner and the Republican leadership? Are you speaking for them when you say you want to restrict the growth of Social Security benefits?
HENSARLING: What I said was, everybody who's presently on—and I speak for nobody but Jeb Hensarling. What I said was, for people who are presently on Social Security and Medicare, they have to have it, those who are close to it, 55 and above.
But those under 55, we have to start a transition to a new system that will save America from bankruptcy and a lower standard of living. I'm happy to say that. I believe they have said it. And you know, I would hope that the president would want to lead on this.
MATTHEWS: OK, but...
HENSARLING: But instead, he says, Well, what I'm going to do is freeze the budget. But he doesn't do it.
MATTHEWS: So what it all comes down to, sir, is after all this arguing and back and forth last Friday up in Baltimore, the difference between the Republicans and the Democrats—between you, sir, and the Democrats—is that you're willing to say on national television, as you are right now, you are willing to restrict growth in future Social Security benefits. You're willing to say, for people who make less than 55 -- or less than 55 years old, you would give them lower Social Security benefits than now projected. You would cut them. You're one to say that, and they're not. That's the difference between you and them.
HENSARLING: Well, I would say that—I'm willing to say that that part of the social contract is going to have to be reengineered. Listen, people under 55...
MATTHEWS: You use clever...
HENSARLING: ... know that the present system...
MATTHEWS: You're using—oh, here we go with...
HENSARLING: ... is going bankrupt.
MATTHEWS: ... Latinate words!
HENSARLING: You know...
MATTHEWS: The Latinate words. This is why people don't trust politicians, including you, sir. "Reengineer, reform"—you mean cut Social Security benefits as a way of balancing the budget. That's what you just said three times. Do you want to say it a fourth time?
HENSARLING: I think—no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no...
MATTHEWS: Reengineer, reform—what's your next Latinate word going to be?
HENSARLING: No, what I'm saying is, if you would look—if you would look—ultimately, ultimately, ultimately, I believe you can get better health care and better retirement security if you go to a defined contribution plan. We had this debate in Social Security a few years ago. Now, ultimately, we weren't victorious. There will be a transition. If you want to say that those under 55, as a transition, are they going to get the same deal as their parents? No, probably not. But the question is...
MATTHEWS: OK. Probably not. So you're probably...
HENSARLING: ... sure, we can get that generation...
MATTHEWS: ... going to cut the Social Security benefits...
HENSARLING: ... (INAUDIBLE) parents, but ultimately...
MATTHEWS: ... future benefits...
HENSARLING: But ultimately...
MATTHEWS: ... and you're going to privatize the plan.
HENSARLING: ... what will happen then is that your children—your children won't be able to go to college. Your children won't be able to have the same opportunities that you had.
HENSARLING: Now, what the big difference is here is, Chris, is that the Democrats are proposing to triple the national debt over the next 10 years. You cannot bail out, borrow and spend your way into economic prosperity. That's why we continue to be mired in 10 percent unemployment in this economy.
MATTHEWS: OK. Thank you.
HENSARLING: And the Republicans propose an actual freeze on non-defense discretionary and to keep spending at its historic levels. I mean, there was a time that Steny Hoyer, the Republican—rather, the Democrat majority leader...
HENSARLING: ... when deficits were $160 billion, said, This is fiscal child abuse.
HENSARLING: And now they're $1.6 trillion and they're singing "Che Sera Sera."
MATTHEWS: OK, well, sir, you've got a lot of guts to come on and talk about cutting future Social Security benefits.
HENSARLING: So that's the difference!
MATTHEWS: And that's what you've done. That separates you from your leaders because I'll bet you by tomorrow morning, you're going to hear from Eric Cantor and you're going to hear from John Boehner, Are you crazy for calling for cuts in Social Security benefits?
Anyway, thank you for doing so because it shows your point of view on how to balance the budget. But that's tough stuff and people aren't going to like hearing it. Anyway, thank you, Jeb Hensarling...
HENSARLING: No, what I said...
MATTHEWS: ... a true Phil Gramm. Coming up...
HENSARLING: ... is number one, you can't do it without reforming...
HENSARLING: ... entitlement spending.
Just days after President Obama's State of the Union and his showdown with House Republicans, is the president beginning to get his groove back?
You're watching HARDBALL, only on MSNBC.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: President Obama, record numbers of young people elected you in support of a clean energy future. If money is tight, why do you propose wasting billions in expensive nuclear, dirty coal and offshore drilling? We need to ramp up efficiency, wind and solar, that are all economically sustainable and create clean and safe jobs for our generation.
BARACK OBAMA, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: Well, you're not going to get any argument from me about the need to create clean energy jobs. I think this is going to be the driver of our economy over the long term.
MATTHEWS: Welcome back to HARDBALL. That was President Obama today taking questions submitted to YouTube.
January's been tough for President Obama. And, lately, he's been pushing back at his critics and showing some of the old energy he had when he first came into office a year ago. Can his new energy help him?
Chuck Todd is NBC News chief White House correspondent, political director. And MSNBC political analyst Eugene Robinson is a Pulitzer Prize-winning columnist for "The Washington Post."
Chuck, I guess one of the goals of the president was to—sort of to smoke out the Republicans, make them come up with proposals. We just heard one. Jeb Hensarling of Texas says, cut Social Security benefits. You've got to wonder that would be one of the goals, force the Republicans to offer alternatives which are painful and unpleasant—Chuck.
CHUCK TODD, NBC NEWS POLITICAL DIRECTOR: Well, I'll tell you, I know that is one of the goals of the White House, is try to figure out how to either force Republicans to defend votes, essentially, because the first year has been all about a referendum on Democratic control of government, because they have had 60 Senate seats for, you know, about four or five months of the Senate, that large majority in the House.
And, of course, they control the White House. And, so, it's all about a referendum on Democrats. And, obviously, the White House, with the loss of the one Senate seat, number one, they do need to figure out how to find a Republican every now and then on different—as long as they have the 60-vote threshold that is needed to govern in the United States Senate.
And, two, they want to figure out how to—how to force the Republicans to defend it, create a choice environment, because, you know, one of the biggest problems—and I remember this was a problem for the—for the Bush White House back in '04, and they changed it—was how to turn a political environment that's a referendum into a choice election, where...
MATTHEWS: Right.
TODD: ... voters sit there and pick A or B.
And it's been very difficult. You know, the Democrats in the House do not make these Republicans do the tough votes that Republicans used to make Democrats do.
MATTHEWS: You know, it's interesting.
Gene, you and have been through this a few times. Every time the Republicans touch what we call the third rail...
EUGENE ROBINSON, MSNBC POLITICAL ANALYST: Mm-hmm.
MATTHEWS: ... they get electrocuted.
MATTHEWS: This fellow, in a very clever way, kept saying, reengineer, reform, lower the benefits.
ROBINSON: It's going to sound...
MATTHEWS: Privatize the program. That was what killed a lot of Republicans over the years, including all kinds of Republicans we know, who have been losing their seats over that.
ROBINSON: No. And that's what it sounds like, is the old Bush proposal, privatize Social Security, essentially...
MATTHEWS: As a way of balancing the budget.
ROBINSON: ... private accounts to balance the budget.
Make it like the federal savings program, which is you know, the next step along that route, certainly. And let's see how that goes over. You know, we know how it went over the last time. It's—it's—that is a third rail issue.
MATTHEWS: Yes.
It's interesting that when you ask Republicans, like him, who are ideologues, and smart ones, their first instinct when you say, how do you balance the budget, after all this loose talk about deficits and debts, how do you actually cut it, they can't get into the discretionary. It's too difficult. They say Social Security, reform it. They go right for the old third rail.
MATTHEWS: Here's President Obama in his State of the Union last week.
Let's listen to his approach to this.
OBAMA: And if the Republican leadership is going to insist that 60 votes in the Senate are required to do any business at all in this town, a supermajority, then the responsibility to govern is now yours, as well. Just saying no to everything may be good short-term politics, but it's not leadership.
MATTHEWS: Chuck, he's trying to say to the public, it's no longer OK for the Republicans to go sit in their corner and let the tea party people battle it out with the Democrats. They're not in their corner. Because of the 60-vote rule, they're basically junior partners in letting the government work. They can't sit on their hands, or else the government won't work, and it's their fault.
TODD: Well, and that seems to be the message out of this White House, when you look at Friday, when he went to the House Republican retreat and had that back-and-forth on various policy questions, and what you saw simply not just out of the State of the Union, but out of Robert Gibbs today, when he talked about how, hey, the American people want, he said, both parties to work to govern.
And, so, they are trying to figure out how to, politically, put Republicans in—in this—in this judgment box, if you will, on governing, so that the country sees—sees them as part of this, too.
What we haven't seen out of the leadership, on the congressional Democratic side or the congressional Republican side, is that, right now, when you look at the Senate Democrats, they seem to fear losing votes sometimes.
This deficit commission was the first time that they—that they brought up a vote they knew they could lose, because they seemed to want to prove a political point. That doesn't always happen.
Over the first year, it seemed as if the Senate leadership wanted to bring up votes that they—only bring up votes they thought they could win, and not highlight losing. I think you may see a different tactic this year, because they want to try to highlight what the Republicans are doing.
MATTHEWS: Is it going to work, Gene?
Do you think what he's doing the last week of really being out there, being energetic, and gung-ho and engaging the Republicans, is that going to give him any ground? Is it going to help him get anything done? Or just blame the Republicans?
ROBINSON: Well, will it immediately help him get anything done? I'm not sure. I think it's a better posture for him.
It—it—it heartens the—the Democratic base to see him out there fighting. And I think it—it does have an impact. It does point out to people that, well, you know, there's the Republican Party. And they can participate in this, too...
MATTHEWS: Yes.
ROBINSON: ... or not. And, if the answer is not, or if the answer is privatize Social Security, then that...
MATTHEWS: Yes, well...
ROBINSON: ... casts a whole different light on the choice that people are going to make in November.
MATTHEWS: Well, here's President Obama at that Republican meeting Baltimore—in Baltimore. We covered it, Keith, Rachel, and I, on Friday night in a two-hour special. But let's listen.
It was really history-making for a president to go into the lion's den and take on every question that the people in that room had for him and get kind of combative. Here he is.
OBAMA: The only thing I don't want—and here I am listening to the American people, and I think they don't want either—is for Washington to continue being so Washington-like.
They didn't send us to Washington to fight each other in some sort of political steel cage match.
MATTHEWS: Last question for Chuck.
I get the feeling part of this is charm offensive. The president's strength is personal. People like him. Doing all this stuff, going to Baltimore with the Republicans, going to the Duke-Georgetown game on Saturday with Joe Biden...
TODD: You're right. Sure.
MATTHEWS: You're laughing, but isn't this all part, Chuck—isn't this all part of just reminding people we like them?
TODD: Well, I think this is about, look, fixing his own political—look, if he—if he fixes his own political problems with the middle right now, right, where we have seen him lose sort of independents, or lose sort of casual Washington observers, meaning folks that are fed up with what was going on in Washington in '06, '08, voted for change, and now aren't really pleased with what's going on now, he seems to be trying to fix himself with that part of the electorate a little bit.
The question is, can he fix his own politics—does fixing his own politics with independents, which calls for looking like you want to do more partisanship, does that help the congressional Democratic cause? In some cases, it will, but, in some cases, they at cross-purposes.
So, that is going to be an interesting dynamic to watch, because, clearly, I think we're seeing the very, very beginnings of Obama trying to right himself in time for 2012.
And the question is, does doing that help? It should help a little bit on the margins for 2010, but does it help all the way, or does it sometimes undermine a little bit of what congressional Democrats want to see done, or at least some of the more rank-and-file on the left?
MATTHEWS: OK. Got to go.
Chuck Todd, thank you.
Eugene Robinson, sir, thank you very much.
Up next: "Saturday Night Live" takes on how the Democrats lost in Massachusetts, how they secretly call this one. They blame it on her. Check out the "Sideshow" coming up next.
You're watching HARDBALL, only on MSNBC.
MATTHEWS: Back to HARDBALL. Time for the "Sideshow."
Now, there's some fun this weekend: "Saturday Night Live"'s opening sketch of the State of the Union, with the president saying what Democrats really think, actually, in this city about Massachusetts and what went wrong up there.
FRED ARMISEN, ACTOR: Now, that election didn't go my party's way.
ARMISEN: So, naturally, all the pundits have their different theories on what it all means.
The fact is, no one knows.
ARMISEN: But there's one thing we do know.
Our nominee, Martha Coakley, was the single most incompetent candidate ever to seek public office in this nation's history!
ARMISEN: Shame on you, Martha Coakley.
ARMISEN: How do you not know that Curt Schilling pitched for the Red Sox?
ARMISEN: Martha Coakley, you are a disgrace.
ARMISEN: You couldn't beat Dick Cheney for mayor of Berkeley.
MATTHEWS: Well, you see the lesson in politics. Democrats kill their wounded like Martha Coakley. Think of what they did to Mondale, to Dukakis, to Al Gore, even to John Kerry to some extent. What do Republicans do to their losers? They run their losers in the next election. Think of Nixon, Dole, McCain. And here comes Mitt Romney. They have different approaches.
MATTHEWS: Up next: Former John Edwards aide Andrew Young is throwing the book at his former boss. But if Young's accounts of Edwards' transgressions are true, how did John Edwards manage to be such a prominent figure in Democratic presidential politics? Get ready for the sleaze.
You're watching HARDBALL, only on MSNBC.
JULIA BOORSTIN, CNBC CORRESPONDENT: I'm Julia Boorstin with your CNBC "Market Wrap."
Stocks kicking off the new month with a rally on a stronger-than-expected report on manufacturing, the Dow Jones industrials surging 118 points, the S&P 500 adding 15 points, the Nasdaq gaining almost 24 points.
Industrials one of the strongest sectors today, after a report showing faster-than-expected growth in U.S. manufacturing. Aluminum giant Alcoa and DuPont chemicals finishing at the top of the Dow.
But report also showing a surprise drop in construction spending, home-building, state and local government construction all on the decline in December.
Energy stocks another bright spot today after a better-than-expected earning reports from ExxonMobil. A 23 percent drop in profits was still less than analysts had predicted.
And the Commerce Department reporting personal income and spending were up for the third straight month in December, those gains in line with last week's reported uptick in the GDP.
That's it from CNBC, first in business worldwide—now back to
ANDREW YOUNG, FORMER AIDE TO JOHN EDWARDS: He had just gotten this musical system put in. (INAUDIBLE) was there, C-SPAN was on, you know, NPR, so and so forth. Here we had some rock music blaring. He was sitting on his back porch watching the rain.
And the wine kept on pouring. And they started talking about, you know, "Once Elizabeth was gone," and the comment was made, "You know, this is the way it should be. And, once Elizabeth is gone, this is the way it will be."
MATTHEWS: The comment was made? The comment was made?
Welcome back to HARDBALL. That was former John Edwards' aide and former loyalist—former loyalist—Andrew Young this past Friday On ABC's 20/20 describing a conversation he said he saw between Edwards and Rielle Hunter, obviously Edwards' girlfriend.
Young's new book is called "The Politician." He will be here on HARDBALL Wednesday. He's making a lot of allegations. But, after staying silent for so long, what is his goal by talking so much now and why didn't he speak up when John Edwards was actually going to be possibly our president, our vice president, maybe our attorney general, or anything important?
Anne Kornblut is a reporter for "The Washington Post," the author of "Notes from the Cracked Ceiling." And MSNBC political analyst Richard Wolffe is the author of "Renegade."
First of all, a quick review from the start. What do we make of somebody who didn't talk when it mattered to us, and only talks now, when it matters to him?
ANNE KORNBLUT, "THE WASHINGTON POST": Well, the whole thing is obviously very distasteful.
And, yet, it's hard, I think, for John Edwards to push back at this point. And some of the allegations, if not all of them, seem believable, given what we know about what went on in that marriage. So, as horrifying as it is, it has a pretty big car wreck quality to it, which is, you don't want to keep looking, but you can't help it.
MATTHEWS: What do you make of this verb form, "Then the comment was made this is the way it should be"?
KORNBLUT: Oh, the passive...
MATTHEWS: No, but him hanging around—him hanging around with his girlfriend, not his wife. "This is the way it should be. The comment was made, you know, this is the way it should be." How about that for a verb form? It didn't say who make the fricking comment.
RICHARD WOLFFE, MSNBC POLITICAL ANALYST: And there seems to be so many of these collective things that were going on with, what would life be like after Elizabeth left?
And this was a—clearly a group of people, a group enterprise, as one...
MATTHEWS: To write this book?
WOLFFE: No, not to write the book.
MATTHEWS: Oh, OK.
WOLFFE: To have these conversations. And, I mean, a lot of people knew what was going on. And...
MATTHEWS: So, you're—you're making the point that this is good—this is good reporting, that this is probably what happened?
WOLFFE: Well, Young was there, right?
MATTHEWS: Yes, I'm saying, he was...
WOLFFE: He's a firsthand source.
MATTHEWS: Yes?
WOLFFE: I mean, this is—this is a witness statement.
MATTHEWS: Don't we usually go with the Woodward and Bernstein, two sources to know what happened?
WOLFFE: You know, listen, the—the—the statement coming out of Edwards was, this guy is just out for the money and the fame.
MATTHEWS: Let's listen to more of Young's account. Here he is on ABC describing how he says Edwards convinced him to help him cover up getting Young—him—to say he was the baby's father of this love child, and getting Young's family to let Hunter move in with them. Let's listen.
YOUNG: -- that this is bigger than any of us. This is what we've fought for for so long. He would always bring back in Elizabeth doesn't have long to live. I know y'all have differences with her, but I love her, and I don't want her to go out this way.
BOB WOODRUFF, ABC NEWS ANCHOR: You had a chance to say no?
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I had a chance to say no. It wasn't that easy because I didn't feel like I could say no.
MATTHEWS: This is so murky. This is a guy saying he's willing to say he's the father of this love child, to use a common expression, so he could protect his boss's wife, who was in very bad health. Your thoughts?
KORNBLUT: I mean, sure. Look, political aides go to bat for their bosses all the time. They probably crossed some ethical lines at times. But at a certain point you have to ask, was he not thinking about the country? John Edwards was going to run. And yes, it was potentially very upsetting for Elizabeth Edwards. But they were running to be president of the United States. Did he not—did it not ever occur to him he might call his boss out or say, no, I'm not going to cooperate in all of this.
Obviously, the appeal to a greater cause is—this is not the first time a politician has said it's not about me, it's about the people. But some of the other things that go on really cast that into doubt that that was what he was after.
MATTHEWS: Wait until you catch the bad ethics involved in this one, Richard. Respond to this little clip. Here's Young, on ABC again, describing what Edwards wanted him to do when they heard that Hunter, the girlfriend, was pregnant. Let's listen to this intrigue.
YOUNG: He asked me and Fred Baron to arrange for a fake paternity test.
WOODRUFF: A fake one?
YOUNG: A fake paternity test. Fake paternity—get a doctor to fake the DNA results. And he asked me and Sherri to steal a diaper from the baby, so that he could secretly do a DNA test to find out if it was, indeed, his child.
MATTHEWS: Fake a paternity test and then steal a diaper to try to avoid DNA evidence. This guy—you've got to look back at some of his legal cases after you look at this methodology, don't you?
WOLFFE: Number one, this is even more sordid and squalid than the affair itself. Number two, what did he to to anger Young to make him this annoyed that he would want to have this retribution? And number three, when you look back at some of the earlier interviews that we saw here, Young seems to be saying that his motive was—he was told other candidates were doing this, too, that other people had skeletons in their closet. To answer Anne's point earlier, he believed everyone was doing this stuff.
MATTHEWS: Doing what, having children with—
WOLFFE: They all had something to hide. So Edwards was no worse than anyone else. What kind—How low do they have to think politics has sunk to think everyone is stealing diapers?
MATTHEWS: Anne Kornblut, is it this bad that they had a case of everybody does it?
KORNBLUT: Look, we know he's not the first politician to cheat on his wife. And obviously this is a case of the extreme, given that they had a child. But Richard's point is exactly right. When did Andrew Young exactly turn? He talks in the interview, the clip you just played, as though he's shocked by what a creep John Edwards is. This is obviously the same person he had worked for for quite some time. And it seems like it was a slippery slope that he evolved over time into this person, but that Andrew Young just had this great awakening. I can't wait for you to interview him, Chris.
MATTHEWS: He was trying to make this guy president of the United States. He wasn't just hanging out with him. Here's Young, by the way, making an allegation about John and Elizabeth Edwards' conversations. This is so strange. He's talking here now about the conversation between his boss to candidate and his wife, after they announced that she had cancer and had returned. Let's listen to this part.
YOUNG: In that press conference, it seemed like Elizabeth was going to die within the week. Within 12 hours, they were openly talking about how her cancer prognosis was going to help them in the polls.
WOLFFE: OK so I actually think this book, with the exception of this piece of it, is better for Elizabeth Edwards. Faced with what her husband was up to, with her own cancer, with the tragedy in her life, losing a son, you can understand why this woman would be behaving in such an extreme fashion.
This kind of politicking about her illness is so distasteful. It is hard to match up, more than anything else coming out of this—hard to match up with that public image.
MATTHEWS: I want to talk to her some time. I'm not sure. I rendered my own person—I always liked Elizabeth. Maybe I'm dead wrong. But I've always like her. Thank you, Anne Kornblut. Thank you, Richard Wolffe.
Up next, for a political movement with so much bluster, why are so many big name conservatives bagging—I love the phrase—somebody wrote this here, "bagging this year's Tea Party convention." Get it? Bagging, tea party? This is HARDBALL, only on MSNBC.
MATTHEWS: We're back in time for the politics fix. David Corn is Washington bureau chief of "Mother Jones Magazine", and Jay Newton-Small is Washington correspondent for "Time Magazine." Thank you both.
This craziness of this for-profit, apparently, Tea Party convention down in Nashville coming up this weekend—you know, here she is, the wife of—the co-organizer, wife of the organizer of the National Tea Party Convention, responded to the criticism in a blog. A lot of criticism coming from people like Michele Bachmann and all, who don't want to go. She wrote, one of the co-organizers, "we have been refrained from responding to many of the attacks that have been thrown at us from other Tea Party groups in the belief we do not want to spread the divisions that are already hurting this movement. Even though that does not seem to be the consideration of others involved in this movement."
This movement's just begun. Somebody's trying to make money on it and somebody else doesn't like it.
DAVID CORN, "MOTHER JONES": What happened was they set up this group. It was a for profit operation. They never said where the money was going, if they made any money. They were dodging what they were paying Sarah Palin. "Mother Jones," we got some internal planning documents saying she will be making 115,000 dollars.
MATTHEWS: Thank god for "Mother Jones," right?
CORN: Thank god for that, yes. They pay me less than that. But thank god for that. Sarah Palin won't specify where that money is going either. But I think the thing that really ticked off the Tea Party people themselves is that they were charging 550 dollars a head; the dinner is going to be serving steak and lobster. And the Tea Party people, I may disagree with them, but they tend to be modest income grass roots activists at the core—at the heart of the movement.
MATTHEWS: The dinner costs 200 bucks, just the dinner.
CORN: It looks like somebody is trying to make a buck off of them.
MATTHEWS: Here's Sarah Palin—I want you in Jay. Here's Sarah Palin first—Governor Palin speaking about speaking at the convention. Let's listen.
SARAH PALIN, FMR. GOVERNOR OF ALASKA: You betcha I'm going to be there. I'm going to speak there because there are people traveling from many miles away to hear what that Tea Party movement is all about, and what that message is that should be received by our politicians in Washington.
I'm honored to get to be there. I won't personally gain from being there. The speaker's fee will go right back into the cause. I'll be able to donate it to people and to events, those things that I believe in, that will help perpetuate the message; the message being, government, you have Constitutional limits. You better start abiding by them.
MATTHEWS: So, Jay, she's going to get 100 percent tax write off, because she has already committed the money—but she does say cleverly, I'll be able to donate, not that she's going to. I don't want to parse it too tightly here.
JAY NEWTON-SMALL, "TIME MAGAZINE": There's a controversy—right—about how they're going to use this money. Maybe she wants to donate it back to this particular group. Maybe it will be another group. Maybe it will be her own PAC, which is going to do all kinds of things to help the parties. We don't know where she is going to give the money. She's just giving it to the movement, quote, unquote.
But it certainly is sort of a weird juxtaposition to say, we're going to have a national Tea Party meeting, when the whole point of the Tea Party is to be grass party roots. It's to be bottom up, rather than top down, saying this is what we are and this is who we are. That's where I think a lot of the struggle is coming from. It's people saying, you're not speaking for me. I'm a Tea Party activist and I'm not going to this thing. So there's a lot of anger. There's a lot of sort of struggling to define themselves here.
MATTHEWS: Who do you think the Tea Party people are? Do you think the Tea Party people are also the real angry people on the far right who don't like Barack Obama because where he comes from?
CORN: I think there's a lot—I think there's a cultural aspect to this, that he doesn't represent their vision of American. On the Sarah Palin question, what she's going to do with the money, the news also came out today that her PAC, Sarah PAC—Sarah Palin's PAC—has spent more money buying copies of her own book than giving contributions to candidates. So she can take that 100,000 dollars, buy copies of her book to give to people in the movement—
MATTHEWS: It's one way to make the best sellers' list. We'll be right back with David Corn. We have a new way to do it. Start a movement and they will pay for the books. Jay Newton-Small, she'll join us back with "Time." You're watching HARDBALL, only on MSNBC.
MATTHEWS: We're back with David Corn of "Mother Jones" and "Time Magazine's" Jay Newton-Small. This weekend, as I mentioned earlier in the program, President Obama and Vice President Biden, his buddy, went to the Georgetown/Duke basketball game here in Georgetown, which Georgetown won, beat the Blue Devils. Here's some commentary from the president, while he explains a failed under the basket shot back in 2008.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Well, we showed this once, if you'd like to see it again.
OBAMA: That's heartbreak right there. Oh.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: That was a nice move, though, Mr. president.
OBAMA: I was sure that was going in.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: You're obviously a left hander. Do you have any problems at all going to your right?
OBAMA: I went to the Republican House caucus just yesterday to prove that I could go to my right once in a while. But there's no doubt that I have a stronger left hand.
MATTHEWS: There's an interesting metaphor, Jay. What do you make of that? He was quick to switch from basketball to politics.
NEWTON-SMALL: Clearly, we had nearly two dozen debates during the primary season. Remember what a bad debater Barack Obama started out in the primary season, how everyone was saying he was really wooden on stage? I think Hillary did him a really good turn, because now it looks like he can get on stage and debate with the best of them. It really brought out the best of the president. Going into the State of the Union, things weren't that great. By the end of the cycle, he was coming out on top.
MATTHEWS: So it's Hillary we give credit to for this weekend's basketball take? Some of these people are amazing, how they can find Hillary did it again. What a great Saturday it was for Hillary Clinton. She got Joe—Oh, she made that—I'm just kidding. I'm teasing.
CORN: But even before that Saturday, it was a great Friday for Barack Obama. When he went before the House GOP and they had the Q&A, that left me, to some degree, breathless.
MATTHEWS: I thought so.
CORN: That was one of the best—
MATTHEWS: Jay, what are your thoughts on that? That Friday night performance, we did a special on it we thought it was so important. What did you make of it?
NEWTON-SMALL: I thought it was great. Look, there's a great tradition in England where you've got the prime minister and he goes up and debates parliament. And he's challenged every day and he's questioned. I wish we had that more in the United States. And you really saw a great exchange of ideas, a great platform from both parties to express what they felt, what they wanted to do. And please, more, more.
CORN: I think in the next couple of days there will be pressure being put on the White House and the GOP to do more of these. I really think it resonated with people on the left and the right, people who Twitter, people who don't. And I think—I would be surprised if you see some movement soon for people to say, hey, let's have our own version of question time here.
MATTHEWS: What was that story, the great story by Swift about the guy who goes off somewhere—
CORN: "Gulliver's Travels."
MATTHEWS: -- where the guys is tied down by all of the midgets. What did you think—did you see that out there Friday night, Jay? All the little Efusians (ph) grabbing him and tying him down. Doesn't it seem like he was struggling to get up and the big giant—what did you make of that dimension?
NEWTON-SMALL: but he wasn't trying too hard not to squash them. He definitely had some good zingers in there.
MATTHEWS: I think it was a good week for the president. He's had a bad month, but a good week. Anyway, thank you very much, David Corn of "Mother Jones,"—congratulations on you scoop about the 115,000 dollar honorarium that Sarah Palin says she's going to put to good causes for her speech this weekend in Nashville. Jay Newton-Small from "time Magazine," Thank you for joining us.
Join us again tomorrow night at 5:00 and 7:00 Eastern for more HARDBALL. Right now it's time for "THE ED SHOW" with Ed Schultz.
Copyright 2010 Roll Call, Inc. All materials herein are protected by United States copyright law and may not be reproduced, distributed, transmitted, displayed, published or broadcast without the prior written permission of Roll Call. You may not alter or remove any trademark, copyright or other notice from copies of the content.
Watch Hardball each weeknight
at 5 & 7 p.m. ET
Copyright 2010 Roll Call, Inc. All materials herein are protected by
United States copyright law and may not be reproduced, distributed,
transmitted, displayed, published or broadcast without the prior written
permission of Roll Call. You may not alter or remove any trademark,
copyright or other notice from copies of the content.
Watch Hardball each weeknight at 5 & 7 p.m. ET


text:
Goes Hard: 6 Asians & 1 Asian Female Go In On A Cypher! (Lil Crazed, Skip, Ace, Trixx, Phlip, Dee & Freshkidd)
"K.i.D Cypher Round 6 - Lil Crazed, Skip, Ace, Trixx, Phlip, Dee ft. Special Guest: freshkiDD "
Please click the "Report" button below if the video on this page is not working properly.
Comments will only be displayed by verified emails. No Spamming or Racism.


text:
Before incorporating an existing picture or story into a new work of art, brace yourself for a potential ringside court session with the original author and the court. That's because your new project may in fact be a derivative work.
What Does Copyright Law Protect?
Copyright law protects original, creative works of authorship such as books, manuscripts, music, film and video productions, computer code and works of art such as paintings and photos—among other things. Authors of these works have exclusive rights to do the following with their work:
- Reproduce the work
- Distribute copies of the work to the public
- Perform the work publicly
- Display the copyrighted work publicly
- Prepare derivative works based upon the work
What Is a Derivative Work?
A derivative work is a new, original product that includes aspects of a preexisting, already copyrighted work.
Also known as a "new version," derivative works can include musical arrangements, motion pictures, art reproductions, sound recordings or translations. They can also include dramatizations and fictionalizations, such as a movie based on a play.
Other examples of derivative works include:
- Translating an English novel into Spanish
- Remixing previously released music
- Creating a sequel to a film using characters and other elements from the original
Who Can Produce Derivative Works?
Only copyright owners have the exclusive right to produce derivative works based on their original, copyrighted works. Copyright on original works of authorship is automatic, and registration—while it does carry significant benefits, like the right to sue for infringement—is not required for a work to be protected; protection attaches immediately when the work is completed.
A copyright owner can grant permission to someone else to make a derivative work based on his or her original. If permission is granted (in the form of a license or assignment), then creation of the derivative work is not infringement.
If the original isn't yours and you don't get permission to use the original from its creator, then you're infringing that author's copyright.
The "Fair Use" Exception
So you've been inspired by someone else's work to make one of your own, and you've used some of that original.
That means you've infringed the original author's copyright, right? Well, not necessarily. There exists a carve-out to infringement that applies with particular force to the derivative works arena: the "fair use" doctrine.
This is a defense available to someone who uses another's work—without permission—in the creation of his or her own. A good example of fair use are works of scholarship that incorporate portions of a copyrighted piece—but only so much as is absolutely necessary to whatever point is being made through its use.
Similarly, book reviews are allowed a certain latitude—it's nearly impossible to review a book well without including any of its language.
Another well-accepted category of fair use is parody: works that use copyrighted (for purposes of this conversation) works to make fun of, criticize or otherwise comment on those original works. 2 Live Crew's use of Roy Orbison's "Oh, Pretty Woman" is a well-known example of parodic fair use.
But fair use is slippery. There are four factors for courts to weigh when a defendant accused of infringement claims the fair use defense, and this four-factor balancing test leads to subjective, unpredictable results.
Although you may think your use is fair, you may find out that the court thinks otherwise.
If you miscalculate, you'll join a long list of artists who have—or who have just thought that no one would notice their appropriation—and who have paid dearly for their mistake.
What if the Work I'm Deriving From Is My Own?
As the copyright holder of an original work of authorship, you have the exclusive right to create derivative works based on that original.
In order for your derivative work work to receive its own copyright, it must be different enough from the original to qualify as a new piece of work.
Simply making minor changes to an original, copyrighted work does not constitute a new derivative work under copyright law.
And, no, that does not mean that you can make minor changes to someone else's work and claim you haven't infringed the original because you haven't created a derivative work—you've just copied it.
What Copyright Protection Is There for Derivative Works?
The copyright on a derivative work covers only new material, appearing for the first time in the derivative work. It does not cover any preexisting material from the original. So the character of Superman is not covered by the copyright on the film "Superman," since the copyright on that character pre-dated the movie.
But any elements new to the film received their copyright from the creation date of "Superman II." This means two things:
- If you license a work from its author so you can make a derivative work based on the original, you do not obtain the copyright on the original. You gain only the right to make the derivative work agreed upon; the owner retains all rights to the original and all its elements.
- The copyright on the original is not extended by the creation of the derivative work. This used to mean more than it does today, since copyrights exist for the life of an author plus 70 years. If an author makes a derivative of his own work, his copyright won't change regardless. But what it does mean is that if a second author makes a derivative work of the first author's original, the copyright on the elements of the original is measured by the life of the original's author—not the derivative work's.
Better Safe Than Sorry
With "new versions" of work becoming more commonplace, the lines between a new creation, a derivative work and copied work can be blurred.
With all these gray areas, it's important to do your homework before you set out to create and publicize something you believe is completely black and white. The take-away: get a license or get a lawyer.


text:
Pittsburgh Penguins D Kris Letang had a stroke
Recommended Video:
PITTSBURGH >> Pittsburgh Penguins defenseman Kris Letang will be out for at least six weeks because of a stroke.
Penguins general manager Ray Shero announced Friday that Letang had a stroke last week.
"Kris had one brief episode of dizziness and nausea last week," Shero said. "We held him out of the Los Angeles game Thursday night, and when he continued to feel ill, tests conducted in Phoenix on Saturday gave us the first indication of his condition.
"Further testing then was conducted when he returned to Pittsburgh, and he continued to undergo a battery of tests here this week."
Letang will be treated with blood thinners and the stroke is not expected to threaten his career.
"I hope that by making my condition public at this time, I can help other people by encouraging them to seek medical help if they experience some of the symptoms associated with a stroke - regardless of their age or general health," the 26-year-old Letang said. "It obviously was a shock to get the news, but I'm optimistic that I can overcome this and get back on the ice."
Letang's most recent game was Jan. 27 against Buffalo.
After being a Norris Trophy finalist last season, he has 10 goals - matching a career high - and 18 assists in 34 games this season for the Eastern Conference-leading Penguins.
Letang has 54 goals and 227 points in 419 games since making his NHL debut with the Penguins during the 2006-07 season.
The Montreal native signed a $58 million, eight-year contract extension last summer.
"The most important thing right now, of course, is Kris' health," Shero said. "We're not thinking about hockey right now. We want to make sure he gets the best possible care and gets better. After six weeks of treatment, doctors will re-evaluate Kris."


text:
Toggle navigation
Published Articles
2019 Income Tax Calculator
Canadian Retirement Income Calculator
RRIF Rates - Current
Mortgage Calculator
Car Loan Calculator
Certified Domain (Go Daddy)
Request for an Appointment with Peter
News - This Month
News - Archive
September 2020 News Archive
August 2020 News Archive
July 2020 News Archive
June 2020 News Archive
May 2020 News Archive
April 2020 News Archive
March 2020 News Archive
February 2020 News Archive
January 2020 News Archive
December 2019 News Archive
November 2019 News Archive
October 2019 News Archive
September 2019 News Archive
May 2019 News Archive
April 2019 News Archive
March 2019 News Archive
February 2019 News Archive
January 2019 News Archive
December 2018 News Archive
November 2018 News Archive
October 2018 News Archive
September 2018 News Archive
August 2018 News Archive
July 2018 News Archive
June 2018 News Archive
May 2018 News Archive
April 2018 News Archive
March 2018 News Archive
February 2018 News Archive
January 2018 News Archive
December 2017 News Archive
November 2017 News Archive
October 2017 News Archive
September 2017 News Archive
August 2017 News Archive
July 2017 News Archive
June 2017 News Archive
May 2017 News Archive
April 2017 News Archive
March 2017 News Archive
February 2017 News Archive
January 2017 News Archive
December 2016 News Archive
November 2016 News Archive
October 2016 News Archive
September 2016 News Archive
August 2016 News Archive
July 2016 News Archive
June 2016 News Archive
May 2016 News Archive
April 2016 News Archive
March 2016 News Archive
February 2016 News Archive
January 2016 News Archive
December 2015 Monthly News
November 2015 Monthly News
October 2015 Monthly News
September 2015 Monthly News
August 2015 Monthly News
July 2015 Monthly News
June 2015 Monthly News
May 2015 Monthly News
April 2015 Monthly News
March 2015 Monthly News
February 2015 Monthly News
January 2015 Monthly News
December 2014 - TFSA Issues
November 2014 -Accessibilty News
October 2014 -Family Tax Cut
Incorporation -Advantages and Disadvantages
2017 to 2020 RRSP Limits,
and When A RRSP Catch Up Loans Make Senses
When to Do Them?
Beware Do it Yourselfers!!
H&R Block Error! Confirms what I have been saying all along!
Lease or Buy Decision
Avoid the Cash Crunch
Franchising an Option for Your Business?
Peter Wiesner, CPA, CA
Licensed Public Accountant
367 Otton Road
Newmarket, Ontario L3X 1E5
Toll Free: 1-800-567-9522
Tel: 905-898-3355
Fax: 905-836-1677
Submit Online Inquiry
Copyright @2020
Our Site
News - This Month
News - Archive
Our Office
Peter Wiesner, CPA, CA
Licensed Public Accountant
367 Otton Road
Newmarket, Ontario L3X 1E5
Find us on Google
tax savings, tax, taxes, newmarke, tax help, tax relief, tax fairness, tax filings, tax arrears, arrears, behind in taxes, tax help, tax advisor, tax professional, professional tax, tax, h&r, h&r, canada tax, tax usa,tax help, tax assistance, tax, tax, tax, audit, audits, audit, audits, glenway taxes, glenway tax, taxes glenway, glenway newmarket,glenway, new incorporation, incorporated business, help with company, company tax assistance,tax, tax, newmarket taxes, taxes newmarket, newmarket taxes, 2011 taxes, newmarket taxes,tax, taxes, taxes, taxes, newmarket tax help, Newmarket taxes, newmarket tax preparation, Tax preparer, Taxes, Tax, taxes, tax, Tax, Tax help, tax services, tax preparation, tax preparation, tax professional, tax professional, taxes newmarket ontario, taxes newmarket, audit, audits, audits, Audit, Audit, Audit, Audits, Audits, Audits, financial statements, financial statements, management accounting, tax preparer, tax preparer, Newmarket taxes, Newmarket accounting, Newmarket, Newmarket, Newmarket, Newmarket, Bradford, Bradford, Bradford, Bradford taxes, Aurora taxes, tax help, tax help newmarket, tax help Newmarket, Aurora, Aurora, Aurora, Aurora Ontario, Aurora, Holland Landing, Holland Landing, Keswick, Keswick, Keswick, Sharon, Sharon, Queensville, GTA,GTA, Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Ontario, Newmarket, Ontario, newmarket ontario. Taxes, tax help, H&R, tax firm, tax help, Newmarket, Ontario Financial Statements, Trusts, Trusts, Trusts, Estates, Estates, Tax Planning. Corporate Tax and Personal Tax, Tax Returns, and Tax Services. Tax professional, taxes, tax planning, Estates, Newmarket, Ontario, Aurora, Aurora, Aurora, Tax, Tax, Taxes, Taxes, Audit, Audits, Financial Statements, Statements, Statements, Statements, York Region taxes, York Region accountant, York Region, tax consultant, voluntary disclosure program, tax advisor, Tax Advisor, tax help, help with taxes, newmarket taxes, tax advisor, corporate tax, corporate financial statements, corporate tax advisor, corporate tax planning, tax planning, tax preparation, newmarket tax advisor, taxes minimization, tax minimization, tax return filing, filing taxes, filings taxes Newmarket, filing taxes newmarket, newmarket tax filing, chartered accountant, licensed public accountant, public accountant, licensed accountant, ontario accountant, tax tips, tax tip, tax help, help taxes, 2011 taxes, 2011 taxes, favourite accountant, favourite accountant newmarket, favourite accountant aurora, tax professional, canadian tax professional, tax advisor, tax help, 2011 tax, 2013 taxes, 2011 tax help, newmarket corporate taxes, 2013 taxes, 2013 income taxes, 2013 tax services, 2013 tax services, 2013 tax preparer, 2013 audits, audit services newmarket, audits newmarket, audit provider Newmarket, GST, HST, WSIB, WSIB, HST, GST, HST, TAX, tax, HST, HST, hst, voluntary disclosure, voluntary disclosure, tax advisor, tax advisory A Member of VICommunity, Powered by QCTI QC Technologies Inc.


text:
Google completes $12b Motorola takeover
Google has closed its $US12.5 billion ($A12.65 billion) deal for Motorola Mobility, a key manufacturer of smart phones and other devices that puts the internet giant in head-to-head competition with Apple.
"The acquisition will enable Google to supercharge the Android ecosystem and will enhance competition in mobile computing," the California-based internet giant said in a statement.
Chief executive Larry Page said Google was acquiring "a great American tech company, with a track record of over 80 years of innovation".
The completion of the deal dubbed "Googorola" follows approval by Chinese, US and European regulators, amid concerns on restrictions for Android, a Google-created free operating system for mobile devices.
Conditions from China's Ministry of Commerce included Google keeping its Android software for smart phones and tablet computers free and open for at least five years.
Regulators in the US and elsewhere have stressed that they will be watching to make sure that the Mountain View, California-based company does not use Motorola Mobility to obtain an unfair advantage in the market.
Google acquires 17,000 patents with the purchase of Motorola Mobility and has been strengthening its patent portfolio in the fight for dominance in the booming smartphone and tablet market.
The Android system snagged 51 per cent of the US mobile phone operating system market in the three months ending in March, according to comScore, while Apple's operating system had 30.7 per cent.
But in the global tablet market, Apple's iPad outmuscled its Android-powered rivals in early 2012, according to research firm IDC.
Some analysts have said Google may be content with the patent portfolio, and sell the handset and other hardware operations.
But Mr Page's comments suggest Google will move headfirst into devices.
"The phones in our pockets have become supercomputers that are changing the way we live," he said.
"It's a great time to be in the mobile business, and I'm confident that the team at Motorola will be creating the next generation of mobile devices that will improve lives for years to come."
Charles Golvin, of Forrester Research, said he expects little change in the smartphone market because Google and Motorola already have Android phones.
"I expect more impact in tablets... that fully exploit the latest innovations in hardware and software," he said.
Greg Sterling of the website Marketing Land said the deal "could result in some exciting new products," including "interesting, new internet-access devices that aren't phones," such as the previously announced "Google Glasses."
Google said it will run Motorola Mobility as a separate business unit that will be a licensee of Android, the Google operating system for mobile devices.
"Android will remain open," the company said.
Heading the unit will be "long-time Googler" Dennis Woodside, who will take over from Sanjay Jha, who led the company through this acquisition.
Mr Woodside, who has overseen integration planning for the acquisition, previously served as president of the Americas region for Google.
"Motorola literally invented the entire mobile industry with the first-ever commercial cell phone in 1983," Mr Woodside said.
"Thirty years later, mobile devices are at the centre of the computing revolution. Our aim is simple: to focus Motorola Mobility's remarkable talent on fewer, bigger bets, and create wonderful devices that are used by people around the world."
Motorola Mobility was created in 2011 when US-based Motorola Inc. split the company into a mobile devices unit on the one hand and a government and public safety division known as Motorola Solutions on the other.
Get the latest news from thewest.com.au in your inbox.
Sign up for our emails


text:
Mia Lavender Blouse
$ 88
A lavender colored blouse with a subtle puff sleeve. Pair with your favorite jeans or skirt for a chic summer outfit.
Fit: Runs TTS
Fabric Content: 71% Nylon 29% Rayon
Fabric Care: Machine Wash Cold Gentle Cycle, Hang dry
Measurements: 22" Shoulder to hem
Lining: No
Zipper: No
Most of our brands tends to run small, if between sizes please go up in size.
- We only offer store credit for returns. A digital gift card will be issued with credit. Please allow 3-5 days for processing once item is received by us.
- We do not provide return shipping. Please note shipping charges will not be refunded.
- Items must be unworn, unwashed and unaltered with tags attached to be eligible for exchange or store credit. Items without tags will be denied.
- All returns and exchanges must be made in 14 days of the postmarked delivery date. Returns older than 14 days will be rejected and shipped back at sender's expense.
- ALL SALE ITEMS ARE FINAL. All items made sale after purchase apply to this requirement as well.
- Custom made items by the shop are final sale with the exception of size exchange in a 14 day time period of purchase date.
- No exceptions will be made, we reserve the right to deny any returns and exchanges if the merchandise returned does not meet our policy requirements.
- Please send returns to: Koo De Ker 177 E 900 S #B. Salt Lake City, UT 84111.


text:
Course Description
ED 405 Diagnosis and Assessment in Special Education 4 cr.
- Offered: Winter
- Prerequisite: ED 360 and ED 400, or ED 407, junior standing or instructor's permission.
Study of diagnostic process in the assessment of intellectual capacity, educability, behavioral and emotional characteristics, and academic achievement. Students are required to administer, score and interpret selected instruments and to compile a diagnostic write-up.


text:
How about 'Don't Give Them Loans at All'?
The big catch phrase for those fighting to keep subsidized student loan interest rates at 3.4 percent is "don't double my rate." That's because the rate is set to increase from 3.4 percent to 6.8 percent on July 1. But if President Obama's Rose Garden pep rally today is any indication, the phrase should be more like "don't raise my rate at all."
The POTUS attacked recently passed legislation in the House–which tracks pretty closely with his own proposal–because, he said, it doesn't do enough to keep loan rates low. Really? The Smarter Solution for Students Act–which, by the way, is hardly all that smart–would set interest rates for subsidized loans at the 10‐year Treasury note plus 2.5 percent. Today, that rate is 2.3 percent. Adding 2.5 to it is 4.8 percent, absolutely not a doubling of 3.4.
Of course, T‐bill rates could, and likely will, rise, but the main point is supposed to be to make student loan rates track with normal interest rates rather than have politicians set them arbitrarily. That was certainly the case over the last few years, when student loan rates didn't plummet along with overall rates. But it seems a tracked rate isn't really what students and colleges want: they want super-cheap–preferably free–loans, which makes sense (for them). Like normal people, they want money at as little cost to themselves as possible. Unfortunately, but not surprisingly, that is what many vote‐seeking politicians want to give them, despite the powerful evidence that aid mainly lets colleges raise their prices at breakneck speeds, fuels demand for frills, and abets serious noncompletion. In other words, it likely does more harm than good.
All of this is why Washington should get out of student aid entirely. But for that to happen, regular people will have to make their catch‐phrase, "Don't give them loans at all."


text:
The Bauhaus art school revolutionised artistic and architectural thinking and work in the 20th century. Today, the original buildings in Weimar, Dessau and Bernau, along with museums and exhibitions, provide an insight into this formative building block of the modern age.
Almost exactly 70 years after the inauguration of the Gropius building in Dessau, the Bauhaus sites in Dessau and Weimar became UNESCO World Heritage Sites in December 1996. The buildings designed by professors including Walter Gropius, Hannes Meyer and Wassily Kandinsky defined the Bauhaus style, which had a decisive influence on the architecture of the 20th century. In July 2017, the World Heritage Site was expanded to include the ADGB Trade Union School in Bernau near Berlin, and the five Houses with Balcony Access in Dessau-Roßlau.
The Bauhaus in Weimar began its work in 1919. Many impressive buildings were constructed in the ensuing years, including the main building of the Bauhaus University and the school of applied arts on Geschwister-Scholl-Strasse. In Dessau, the art school became a magnet for the avantgarde of the time. The building was designed by Walter Gropius and opened in 1926. The idea of modernity in architecture and design began its triumphant march in Dessau in buildings such as the "Masters' Houses" or the Dessau–Törten estate featuring houses with balcony access, which are a prime example of the development in the construction of social housing.
Construction of the ADGB Trade Union School in Bernau was overseen by Hans Wittwer and Hannes Meyer, who held the position of director of the Bauhaus in Dessau from 1928 to 1930. The Trade Union School remains a preeminent example of separate, individual structures integrated cohesively into the surrounding natural landscape. The historical Bauhaus canteen in Dessau features stools designed by Marcel Breuer, where students can still sit and eat while passionately philosophising about modernity.
Bauhaus building open daily: 10:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.
Masters' Houses open daily: 10:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. (April – October)
and from 11:00 a.m. – 5:00 p.m. (November – March)
The Houses with Balcony Access are not open to the public. A show apartment in its original state can be seen on the guided architectural tour of the Dessau-Törten housing estate.
Guided tours
See times at www.bauhaus-dessau.de
Bauhaus walks:
April to October: Tuesday, Friday and Saturday 1:30 p.m. from Bauhaus Museum or at 2:00 p.m. from Bauhaus.Atelier
November to March: Friday and Saturday at 1:30 p.m. from Bauhaus Museum or at 2:00 p.m. from Bauhaus.Atelier
Bauhaus Museum opening hours:
26 March - 28 October: Monday, Wednesday to Sunday 10:00 a.m. - 6:00 p.m.
29 October. - 7 January: Monday, Wednesday to Sunday 10:00 a.m. - 4:00 p.m.
Guided tours: Monday and Sunday 1:00 p.m.
Bauhaus.Atelier | Info Shop Café, visitor centre at Bauhaus University in Weimar:
April to November: Monday to Friday 10:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m., Saturday and Sunday 1:00 p.m. to 5:00 p.m.
December to March: Tuesday to Friday 10:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m., Saturday 1:00 p.m. to 4:00 p.m.
The ADGB Trade Union School in Bernau is not open to the public. The interior of the building can be accessed only on guided tours.
See times at: www.bauhaus-denkmal-bernau.en
Bauhaus sites in Weimar, Dessau and Bernau is part of the '' UNESCO route. Other stops on the route are:
UNESCO World Heritage sites:
Other towns and cities worth seeing:
Două combinaţii de taste utile pentru a mări şi micşora în browser-ul de internet:
Mărire: +
Micşorare: +
Pentru ajutor suplimentar, faceţi clic pe iconiţa aferentă a browser-ului dvs.:


text:
Anwar al-Awlaki (also spelled Aulaqi; Arabic: أنور العولقي Anwar al-'Awlaqī; born April 22, 1971) is a dual citizen of the U.S. and Yemen, of Yemeni descent. He is an Islamic lecturer, spiritual leader, and former imam . According to U.S. officials, he is a senior talent recruiter and motivator, who has also become "operational" as a planner and trainer, "for al-Qaeda and all of its franchises". The U.S. Under Secretary of the Treasury for Terrorism and Financial Intelligence warned that al-Awlaki "is extraordinarily dangerous, committed to carrying out deadly attacks on Americans and others worldwide". With a blog, a Facebook page, and many YouTube videos, he has been described as the "bin Laden of the Internet".
Al-Awlaki's sermons were attended by three of the 9/11 hijackers. He reportedly met privately with two of them in San Diego. Investigators suspect al-Awlaki may have known about the 9/11 attacks in advance. In 2009, he was promoted to the rank of "regional commander" within al-Qaeda, according to U.S. officials.
His sermons were also attended by accused Fort Hood shooter Nidal Malik Hasan. U.S. intelligence intercepted at least 18 emails between Hasan and al-Awlaki in the months prior to the Fort Hood shooting, including one in which Hasan wrote: "I can't wait to join you ." After the shooting, al-Awlaki praised Hasan's actions. In addition, according to U.S. officials, "Christmas Day bomber" Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab said al-Awlaki was one of his al-Qaeda trainers, who met with him and was involved in planning or preparing his attack, and provided religious justification for it. In March 2010, al‑Awlaki said in a videotape that jihad against America was binding upon every able Muslim.


text:
My Account
Shopping Cart
Cannot access this performance because it occurred in the past: 6/16/18 9:30 PM.
The selected performance is NOT available for sale.
Please Select Tickets
You have selected:
Sex Tips for Straight Women from a Gay Man
Saturday, June 16, 2018
The 777 Theatre
777 8th Avenue
(between 47th and 48th streets)
New York,
1, 2, 3, 7, A, C, E, N, Q, R, S to Times Square/42nd Street
In this three-character romantic comedy featuring a straight woman, a seductive model, and you-know-who, audiences are welcomed into a fun-filled world of foolproof moves and insider advice that could only be culled from that most insightful of individuals: the gay man.
Sex Tips for Straight Women from a Gay Man is approximately 69 minutes and will be performed without an intermission. Come with a friend, leave with our tips. The rest is up to you...
If you need assistance placing your order, call OvationTix customer service toll-free: 866-811-4111. Do not exit your Web browser.
Customer service hours: 9am - 9pm M-F / 10am - 9pm Sat + Sun (Eastern Time)
Server Executed in 25ms